1. Executive Summary

This publication was prepared as a background paper for an Asia–Pacific Fishery
Commission
(APFIC) Regional consultative workshop on "Certification schemes for capture fisheries
and aquaculture" held
in Viet Nam 18–20 September 2007. At the
29th APFIC Session (21–24 August 2006) in Kuala
Lumpur, member countries recommended that APFIC's work should focus on "Certification
in Fisheries" as one
of the emerging issues for the fisheries sector in the region. To follow up on this
recommendation, this
paper assesses the potential costs and benefits of fisheries certification and branding for
countries in the
Asia–Pacific region. It does not examine certification of aquaculture production, which is
to be
covered under a separate publication.

The publication starts by providing a comprehensive review of existing and recent
environmental
and social certification schemes in fisheries, as well as some examples of branding. It then considers
the hypothetical and actual evidence for the demand for, and benefits of, such initiatives.
Related costs
are also discussed, before considering the net benefits of such initiatives, i.e. benefits
less costs. There is
a dearth of studies and very little quantitative evidence published on the financial costs
or the benefits
of certification or branding schemes; this gap is even more pronounced when it comes to an
assessment
of the net benefits. There is some evidence that the conditions attached to certified fisheries do
encourage improved institutional structures and operational practices, but to date these are largely restricted
to established, well-managed fisheries.

The publication summarizes work by others that have highlighted the potential problems
faced
by developing country producers in engaging with both certification and branding
initiatives,
before presenting some possible solutions.

It is not easy to determine whether it is sensible to engage with certification and/or
branding initiatives
for particular products or fisheries. The net benefits are likely to be too specific to the
particular country
and product concerned, the end market, the characteristics of the supply chain and so forth.
Generalizing about the actual costs and benefits is, in almost all cases, neither possible
nor advisable. As a result,
the main focus of the paper is attempting to provide some assistance to APFIC members
on
how to make decisions about whether engaging in certification and/or branding
initiatives is a good idea.
This assistance takes the form of suggestions on how to conduct cost–benefit analyses as
well as a
simple decision-making tree. The decision-making tree could usefully be field tested in a
small number
of countries. This would enable its refinement for later use and replicability, while at the same
time providing some practical assistance to the countries concerned in making decisions
about the feasibility
of certification or branding for particular products or fisheries.

The publication concludes that certification and branding are only aspects of product
promotion and that
it is almost certainly more important to comply first with the basic mandatory requirements
of food
safety and hygiene (i.e. in terms of HACCP compliance). There are also many other ways (e.g.
quality improvements, pricing strategies and improvements in logistics to meet client
requirements) that may be
at least as effective as certification or branding in helping producers and exporters to
improve the
net value-added of their business operations. Traceability is also expected to become
increasingly
important in this regard.